Rating: 
Summary: the cold competence of survival
Review: Boukreev and DeWalt deliver an unsparing uncompromising memoir of the the May 96' Scott Fischer expedition in "The Climb" without the blame, racism, lyrical embellishment or factual distortion of Jon Krakauer's widely-hailed "Into Thin Air." Still, "The Climb" manages to indict all creatures great and small who dare assault Chomolungma-Sagarmatha, including Boukreev himself; imparting a sense of truth which resonates where "Thin Air" never will.I've now read "Into Thin Air," "The Climb" and most recently, "Death Zone" by Matt Dickinson. Although Dickinson's account tracks a British summit attempt from the North Face(as opposed to the Southern summit attemps of Fischer/Hall), the author's factual corroboration & point-of-view conversion from indignant humanist to resigned survivalist when assessing the essential element of "cold competence" necessary to escape the death zone is revealing where Krakauer's is self-serving. "Death Zone" only confirmed my initial impressions of "The Climb" while amplifying my disdain for "Thin Air." The "Cold competence" of factual distortion. Krakauer used "cold competence" as a heading to one of his chapters yet failed to acknowledge this component when personally appraising Bourkeev's behavior on that fateful day. As "The Climb" aptly frames Boukreev's cold competence, so does cold competence explain Krakauer's own front-running inclination to chase Boukreev to the summit as Boukreev broke trail on the last leg of the ascent or, Krakauer's own early descent with total disregard for his team or expedition leader. How does Krakauer explain himself after abandoning his team, after disregarding the wait-for-the-rest-rule imposed by his expedition leader, Rob Hall? He asked Neil Beidleman, a guide from Fischer's expedition, for permission. Of course, Krakauer never castigates Boukreev for leading the ascent--not with Krakauer using Boukreev to "further his own ends." But as "The Climb" demonstrates, Boukreev's descent behavior & rationale **was no different** from that displayed or expressed during his ascent; and from a timing perspective, hardly separable from Krakauer's own either ascending or descending. Indeed, Krakauer, using oxygen at a rate perhaps equivalent to or exceeding the much-maligned(by Krakauer)Sandy Hill Pittman, was even more anxious than Boukreev in his race down the mountain. That Boukreev and Martin Adams passed Krakauer on a segment of the descent where Krakauer was "distressed," both knowing 2 of Hall's guides were right there to assist, must have still rankled the hypersensitive Krakauer to no end--evidence Krakauer's obsessive public prosecution of Boukreev, Lopsang Sherpa, Pittman and others to mask his own failings and more. Krakauer also does a credible bit of lying himself--an accusation Krakauer liberally applied to Boukreev & DeWalt in subsequent exchanges--if one tracks his claims to have a) helped fix rope from Hillary Step to South Summitt b) "asked" rather than demanded Martin Adams to "go fetch some rope" and screws from Camp IV as Krakauer sat on a slope stuck and somewhat lost. If the latter seems insignificant, consider the follwing: 1) Krakauer mistakenly thought Adams was Hall guide Andy Harris & stubbornly resisted acknowledging his mistake, much to the distress of Andy Harris's family; Adams is consistent with his assertion(in "The Climb") that Krakauer brusquely *ordered* him to go fetch--as most would given Krakauer's predicament at the time. Adams was understandably indignant at the thought of someone(he didn't know it was Krakauer then) who'd gotten himself in a jam ordering him around after Adams barely survived 2 falls into crevasses during his descent. Yet Krakauer goes to great pains to "modify" the facts here and elsewhere of his own behavior towards others; in this instance asserting he'd "asked" Adams to fetch--even prefacing his request(in his account) with a "please." Yes, when stuck in a blizzard at 8000m facing imminent death, climbers always retain their composure, courtesy, civility. In "Thin Air," Krakauer also claims to have helped fix rope on the ascent leg from Hillary Step to South Summit. Wrong. Beidleman, in "The Climb," confirms Krakauer gave him approximately 300ft of rope Krakauer was carrying just before Krakauer and Hall guide Andy Harris broke ranks to chase Boukreev to the summit. No one other than Krakauer in "The Climb" or "Thin Air" supports Krakauer's claim of fixing rope anywhere on the mountain. This despite Krakauer's not-so-subtle allusions to his guide-like urges to lead, his guide-like claims of climbing proficiency or his god-like inclination to judge. The "cold competence" of blame. Boukreev descended before the weather turned horrific. Again, no one in "The Climb," "Thin Air" or "Death Zone" expected or suspected the blizzard to come--except perhaps Lene Gamelgaard. More importantly, Boukreev and Beidlemen lacked radios--a critical causative determinant in Boukreev's disconnect from the statuses of Fisher, his clients or fellow guide Neil Beidleman during his descent--which Krakauer, of course, conveniently minimizes. Had Boukreev been carrying a radio, had he known the positions or distress of Fischer/his clients and arrested his own descent, would Pittman, Fox and others be alive today? Maybe, maybe not. Would he have escaped the blame of Krakauer's considerable mega-finger had he died? Undoubtedly. Almost certainly. And Krakauer would still be warm, safely ensconced in his tent. Dickinson, in the "Death Zone," confirms Boukreev's timeline of the storm's onset. He also questions Boukreev's early descent but later acknowledges his own naivete, his idealistic delusions of reflexive self-sacrifice by those who climb or guide mountains. The "cold competence" of Krakauer's racism. I've not noticed this mentioned at all or observed in other reviews but can Krakauer's obvious disdain for Asians be any clearer? Every Asian within pointing distance--whether Nepali, Chinese or Japanese--is inordinately disdained, denigrated or demeaned by Krakauer in "Thin Air" despite the revealed incompetence of others--the South African expedition, for example. Boukreev, by contrast, acts with what Krakauer only adorns: contrition. The Climb's account of Boukreev's unsentimental pilgrimage to honor Fischer's and Namba's remains is indicative of Boukreev's real nature: a coldly competent climber, a conscientious, unfacile human being. When Namba's husband appears on the mountain in the vicinity and at the time Boukreev did, the meeting struck one as providential. That Boukreev managed to convey Namba's effects to her husband before Boukreev himself perished can rightfully be perceived as an act of redemption; a redemption Krakauer may never realize, self-serving pleadings & mea culpas notwithstanding. ...
Rating: 
Summary: For a different perspective
Review: This is a quick read, one or two days maximum, and worth the time even though the book is not especially well written. "The Climb" is another account ("Into Thin Air," by Jon Krakauer, is the first) of the events of a 1996 expedition to summit Mt. Everest. The Climb was co-authored by Anatoli Boukreev, a guide on the Mountain Madness expedition that was, some feel, treated unfairly in Krakauer's account of the disaster (this is arguable - Krakauer did question some of Anatoli's actions, but he was much more severe in his criticism of Rob Hall and Scott Fischer, the principal guides on the Mountain Madness (Fischer) and Adventure Consultants (Hall) expedition teams. Thus, most of the book is presented as a defense of the actions of Anatoli and the Mountain Madness team, and the reader is poorly served as a result. Krakauer, in particular, seems to have drawn the ire of the co-authors for questioning the decisions made on the fateful summit day. Unfortunately for the reader, however, The Climb does not take the time to step back and view the forest from the trees, so to speak, and one is constantly reminded that the sole object of the book is to hail the efforts of Anatoli at the expense of all others. The result is a rather muddled account of the disaster, without a treatment of what the other climbers and expeditions were doing while the disaster was playing out. Into Thin Air presents a much more comprehensive, thorough approach, and in this respect far outclasses The Climb in terms of readability. Despite these shortcomings and the author's less than balanced approach to his subject, the book does shed considerable light on Anatoli's decisions, and one comes away with a better appreciation for his actions. Whether or not Anatoli's actions were correct, I am certainly not qualified to judge, but his bravery is above reproach, and the book did a credible job of restoring Anatoli's reputation as an heroic and dedicated climber. Although countless mistakes were made on Everest in 1996, all present seemed to have done everything in their power to save lives once the disaster was in full bloom. Rob Hall and Scott Fischer obviously paid for their mistakes not only with their lives, but those of their clients, and I am sure that both men, were they alive today, would be the first to censure themselves. But all climbers who sign on for such an expedition knew full well the risks they took, as well as the risks they could not plan for. All who died will be remembered as intrepid souls who risked their lives in search of a more fulfilling existence, and for that they should be commended. Deplore the mistakes, but not the people who made them. We can only hope that future expeditions will learn from the accounts presented here and in Into Thin Air.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Book. A Great Rebuttal to Karkauers' Story
Review: In literary terms, the book is no match for Into Thin Air. However, the book is written well enough to be considered a good book. I would strongly recommend this book for anyone who has read Into Thin Air because there are ALWAYS two sides to every story, and Boukreev airs his version of what happened on Everest in 1996 when so many people died.
Rating:
Summary: The Non-Fiction Account
Review: ...I had heard of Anatoli Boukreev and was curious about his side of the story...you get a picture of a consumate professional who did what he was supposed to: keep people alive. If you want a behind-the-scenes look at what it means to climb Everest I cannot recommend this book highly enough....END
Rating: 
Summary: Great climber, flawed book
Review: Just about everybody agrees that Boukreev was one of the world's greatest Himalayan climbers. But his personality wasn't suited for guiding rich novices up Everest, and he didn't show very good judgment in choosing G. Weston DeWalt to write "The Climb" for him. DeWalt is a worse than mediocre writer, and he protests way too much that Boukreev didn't make any mistakes on Everest in 1996. DeWalt also spends way too much time slandering John Krakauer, who didn't even criticize Boukreev that harshly in his much more carefully researched and more balanced book, "Into Thin Air." DeWalt's arguments are based mostly on innuendo and highly selective presentation of the facts. He appeals to readers' emotions rather than their intellects, apparently hoping that his claims wouldn't be subjected to critical analysis. I for one found DeWalt's methods insulting to my intelligence. If you really want to know how much better "Into Thin Air" is than "The Climb," try reading "The Climb" first. You'll quickly realize how many holes there are in the Boukreev-DeWalt book, and you'll better appreciate how it was written as an overly defensive response to Krakauer. If you're going to read "The Climb," you owe it to yourself to read the 1999 paperback edition of "Into Thin Air," which has a detailed new postscript that convincingly debunks DeWalt's overstated claims.
Rating: 
Summary: Two Sides of the Same Story
Review: I have been fascinated by this event ever since the news was first reported. A devoted acrophobe, I couldn't understand why anyone would risk life and limb to climb a mountain that didn't really need climbing. I was originally prepared to disbelieve The Climb based on my reading of other accounts, but I found it gripping and truthful, answering many questions left by the others. While I greatly respect Jon Krakauer's account (Into Thin Air) he was on a different team and had different experiences from Anatoli Boukreev. Both authors were dealing with their own exhaustion, hypoxia and hypothermia while in the midst of chaos and so details are bound to differ. It is only by reading Boukreev's and Krakauer's accounts and that of the IMAX team (Everest: Mountain Without Mercy) that can one get something of a picture of what happened in May 1996. I highly recommend this book. One flaw to note -- the paperback does not have the "eight pages of dramatic photos" mentioned on the back cover.
Rating:
Summary: Sadly The End of the Debate
Review: Good book from a different viewpoint then Into Thin Air. Too bad Anatoli Boukreev had to perish himself a little over a year later in an Avalance. This book helps us to understand his point of view. He was a great mountaineer and a great man. May he rest in peace.
Rating:
Summary: mandatory, if you have read "Into thin air"
Review: I got this book for Christmas from the same friend who gave me "Into thin air" a year ago. The Krakauer book leaves you both stunned and outraged (see my review), and while it is clearly very well written, it leaves many questions open. Boukreev's book answers a lot of these questions. Written with the intention of clearing his name, his account of the tragic events that engulfed the Mount Everest Expeditions of '96 comes across as very genuine and matter-of- fact. While it lacks Krakauer's slickness, it is still a very good and somehow more believable story. Krakauer was on a different expedition team than Boukreev, and while Krakauer's account is written as if he were part of all the expeditions that where up there and knew everything about them, Boukreev focuses on what went on with the Mountain Madness team that he was on. The main information on the mountain events is translated from Boukreev's diary, and his co-author has Dewalt has filled in the connecting information. In spite of this patchwork style the book is very readable and has an authenticity to it that Krakauer's book is clearly lacking.
Rating:
Summary: Another perspective.
Review: This book is great for what it is...the recollections of a professional mountain climber during the ascent and subsequent rescue of commercial expeditions on Everest in 1996. It's written in a matter-of-fact style that doesn't dally so much on the personal shortcomings of the participants. When the authors do bring criticism against individuals (almost always Krakauer or Pittman), it seems misplaced. The Adventure Consultants expedition is frequently referred to as "Krakauer's" even though he was only a client. And I think that only Krakauer is referred to as a "climber-client" and not merely as a "client" implying that he had some responsibility when things went bad. Personally, I didn't think "Into Thin Air" was that critical of Boukreev. No one can question that Boukreev's actions saved the lives of 3 others that had no hope. Thankfully the book doesn't spend much time heaping accolades on Boukreev or on placing much blame. In the end, it was individual decisions that led to the tragedies...tragedies that could have been even worse. The response from DeWalt to Krakauer is forgettable, but the transcription of the debriefing tapes gives even more views as to what went on. The quotes from Boukreev and Lopsang, while occasionally difficult to understand, provide the most insight.
Rating:
Summary: The Everest Hero That No one Will Forget!
Review: Before you read "Into Thin Air" you must read this book. If you've already read "Into Thin Air" then read it again after you read the "The Climb." You'll see how Jon Krakauer warped his story to make himself sound good and make the hero of Everest 1996, Anatoli Boukeev, look bad. In Anatoli's book you'll see why he did what he did. Most of it was because he had done it like that for all of his climbing life. There is no doubt that Anatoli was the strongest climber on Everest in 1996. He saved many lives on that stormy night in May of 1996. Jon Krakauer wouldn't even help look for his on teamates. Anatoli single handly saved lives with no help. I was very sad when I learned that Anatoli had died, but he died doing something he loved to do. Anatoli never did get the praise that he really was intitled to before he died. Climbing was his life, he never thought about not going out and rescuing the stranded climbers on Everest. He just did it! Every climber should mold there climbing career after Toly's. Jon Krakauer and others can warp there story all they want but the " The CLimb" tells what really happened on Everest. Anatoli was the hero on Everest in '96, he died a hero, and I will always remember him as the hero on Everest and to me!
|
